On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 19:25:40 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> On 19/09/2011 06:49 PM, Darren New wrote:
> 
>> Uh, no. VNC was *specifically* designed to be trivial to implement at
>> both ends.
> 
> And here I was thinking it was designed to, you know, allow you to
> remote control things. Because there aren't any other cross-platform
> solutions for doing that.

Like RDP, for example?  Yes, I have an RDP client that runs on Linux.

>> Except you aren't the person who designed VNC. You're the person who
>> should be using RDP or maybe X-Windows, or NeWS, or any of the other
>> dozens of remote graphics solutions.
> 
> It's news to me that "dozens of remote graphics solutions" exist. It's
> certainly news to me that any of them work on more than one platform.

Teamviewer, VNC, NoMachine's NX client/server, XDMCP...I could go on.

>> Ask the guys who wrote VNC, which runs in a web browser too, you know.
> 
> In what universe is that useful?

In a universe where you don't have or want to install a full-blown client 
locally.

Say you need to remotely access a system from your public library's 
computer.  I'm sure they won't let you install arbitrary software on 
their system.  But they probably have Java installed for the browser.

Hell, the remote exams I used to run at Novell could be run in a browser 
- far easier to support in some ways than having to walk a non-technical 
person through installing a client and making sure the software 
functioned properly.

Jim

Post a reply to this message